America's Affordable Health Care Act of 2009

Madam Speaker, pursuant to House Resolution 976, I call up the bill (H.R. 3326) making appropriations for the Department of Defense for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2010, and for other purposes, with a Senate amendment thereto, and ask for its immediate consideration in the House.

Madam Speaker, I offer the motion at the desk.

Madam Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks and to include tabular and extraneous material.

I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Madam Speaker, Members of the House, this is the largest appropriations bill that we have ever handled. It was completely bipartisan. We never did anything without working together. It is basically the same bill we voted on before it went to the Senate but with a few minor changes. I am pleased to say that we made some conciliatory changes with the White House and also with the Senate. This, as a matter of fact, is $625 billion. The House passed $636 billion. It pays for first-class medical care for military personnel.

I have to say I don't usually talk on any one thing, but having been out at Bethesda in intensive care for 2 days, I have to endorse the money that we have spent on the care at Bethesda. They did a marvelous job, and I am so pleased about the way the money is being handled out there.

Medical research, of course, the committee under my leadership and under the leadership of Jerry Lewis and Bill Young, has always been in the forefront. There are peer-reviewed programs, which have turned out to be as good as any programs you will find any place. We are supporting military families, operations and maintenance, civilian workforce, and insourcing. We are trying to reduce the contractors, and we are struggling in doing that. The inspector of general oversight, we worked at that for 2 or 3 years. This bill includes the MRAP program and $526 million for situational awareness.

In other words, this is as good a bill as we could come up with given the amount of money that was apportioned to us.

The Fiscal Year 2010 Defense Appropriations Bill puts troops first, ensuring their readiness, providing them with first class weapons and equipment, and ensuring the availability of care and support for their families.

The bill makes critical investments in the health, well-being and readiness of our armed forces; addressing issues raised by service members, their families, and Department of Defense officials in testimony before the Congress, and discovered through visits to military bases across the United States and overseas. The bill also reins in the use of contractors and begins to return inherently governmental functions to Department of Defense personnel.

For the first time since the beginning of operations in Iraq, this bill includes funding for Overseas Contingency Operations in Afghanistan and Iraq for the upcoming fiscal year; providing $128.3 billion to support current operations, and to meet the needs of our troops in the field and their families here at home. The bill does not address the President's new Afghanistan security strategy because the Administration has yet to request funding for that initiative.

[Bill total in billions]

2009 Total Enacted...............................................$625.3 President's Request...............................................640.1 House Passed......................................................636.3 Senate Passed.....................................................636.3 2010 Total Bill...................................................636.3

Military Personnel and Pay: The bill provides a 3.4 percent military pay increase, 0.5 percent above the request. The bill also includes $1 billion pursuant to an amended budget request in order to increase U.S. Army troop strength.

First Class Medical Care: The bill recommends a total of $29.2 billion for the Defense Health Program, $3 billion above fiscal year 2009 and $1 billion above the 2010 request. The increase includes $307 million above the request to provide for shortfalls in the TRICARE program. The bill also includes $300 million above the request for transportation infrastructure issues related to base closure.

To provide quality medical care for service members and their families, and address the serious financial challenges facing the Defense Health Program, the bill recommends the following funding:

HIV Research................................................$20,000,000 Wound Care Research..........................................13,000,000 Traumatic Brain Injury and Psychological Health Research ($372m budget

+ $120m over budget)......................................120,000,000 Global HIV/AIDS Prevention...................................10,000,000 Peer-Reviewed Medical Research Program.......................50,000,000 Peer-Reviewed Breast Cancer Research........................150,000,000 Peer-Reviewed Ovarian Cancer Research Program................18,750,000 Peer-Reviewed Prostate Cancer Research Program...............80,000,000

Supporting Military Families: The bill provides greater support for military families. The bill includes funding for quality child care, job training for spouses, and expanded counseling and outreach to families that have experienced the separation and stress of war. The bill fully funds $472.4 million for Family Advocacy programs and fully funds Family Support and Yellow Ribbon programs.

Operation and Maintenance: The bill recommends $154 billion for operation and maintenance, an increase of $1.3 billion above the fiscal year 2009 enacted level. The recommendation includes funding above the budget request for the following items:

Hybrid Operations Readiness Training (Hybrid--DoD's new terminology for

full-spectrum training)...................................$43,000,000 Army Helicopter Readiness Training..........................142,000,000 Navy Aircraft Depot Maintenance..............................35,000,000 Environmental Restoration....................................32,500,000

The recommendation rebalances funding from preparing for Cold War-era types of conflicts to the highest priority readiness requirements for the hybrid operations that the military services will be facing for the foreseeable future. The bill also includes adjustments based on trends in DoD budget execution.

Civilian Workforce and In-Sourcing: The bill supports increased funding for DoD civilian personnel to in-source workload. The Department estimates that every position converted from contract to federal civilian saves on average $44,000 per year. Additionally, the bill includes general provisions to suspend further conversions by the Department of Defense from government functions to contractors.

The bill also includes $100 million, as requested, to fund further development and training for the DoD acquisition workforce.

Inspector General Oversight: the bill includes $288 million, $16 million above the request, for the Inspector General to hire additional investigators to ensure proper oversight of DoD acquisition and contracting.

Procurement Programs: The bill recommends $104.4 billion for procurement, an increase of $3.46 billion above the fiscal year 2009 enacted level and a decrease of $816 million below the 2010 request. The bill includes:

$6.8 billion, the requested amount, for the procurement of 30 F-35 Lightning Aircraft, 16

Short Take-off and Vertical Landing variants for the Marine Corps, 4 Carrier variants for the Navy, and 10 conventional variants for the Air Force.

$465 million above the request to continue development and initial procurement of the Alternative Engine for the Joint Strike Fighter.

$2.5 billion above the request for procurement of 10 additional C-17 aircraft.

The bill also includes:

$6.3 billion for the Mine Resistant Ambush Protected Vehicle Fund, an increase of $825 million above the request.

$526 million as requested for Situational Awareness upgrades to 353 Bradley Fighting Vehicles.

$498 million for the procurement of Family of Medium Tactical Vehicles.

$613 million for the procurement of Family of Heavy Tactical Vehicles.

$15 billion, $120 million above the request, for Navy Shipbuilding and Conversion and the National Defense Sealift Fund for the procurement of 7 Navy ships, including: one DDG-51 Guided Missile Destroyer; one SSN-774 Attack Submarine; two Littoral Combat Ships; and one Intra-theater Connector Ship (joint high speed vessel to move personnel and equipment within theater).

Additionally, this funding provides for the final increments of funding for the CVN-78 Aircraft Carrier, the third DDG-1000 Guided Missile Destroyer, and the tenth LPD-17 Amphibious Transport Dock.

$30 million, not requested, for the shipbuilding loan guarantee program to assist in stimulating the domestic shipbuilding industry.

$1.5 billion for the procurement of 18 F/A-18E/F Super Hornet Tactical aircraft, nine above the request.

$1.6 billion, the requested amount for 22 EA-18G Growler electronic attack aircraft.

$2.7 billion for the procurement of 30 MV-22 and five CV-22 Osprey aircraft.

$950 million for National Guard and Reserve Equipment.

Research and Development: The bill recommends $80.5 billion for research and development, an increase of $17 million above the fiscal year 2009 enacted level, and a $2 billion increase over the fiscal year 2010 request. Major funding items include:

$4 billion for the continued development of the F-35 Lightning Joint Strike Fighter aircraft, $430 million above the President's request.

$130 million for Presidential Helicopter, of which $100 million is for technology capture to recoup investments in research and development of the VH-71, an increase of $44.8 million above the request.

$306 million for the development of the Next Generation Aerial Refueling Aircraft.

$62 million for JSTARS re-engineering research and development, an increase of $46 million above the request.

$202 million for the Israeli Cooperative Program (Arrow). The recommendation is $82.8 million above the President's request.

$50.5 million, the President's request for Ballistic Missile Defense European Capability.

$2.2 billion for the continued development of the restructured Future Combat Systems Program.

$1.2 billion for the continued development of the P-8A Multi-mission Maritime Aircraft.

$387.5 million, the President's request, starting development of the replacement for the Ohio class ballistic missile submarine.

$526 million for the continued development of the DDG-1000 Guided Missile Destroyer.

Overseas Contingency Operations: The recommendation addresses a number of policy issues concerning operations in Iraq and Afghanistan including:

A general provision prohibiting the establishment of permanent bases in Iraq or Afghanistan;

A general provision prohibiting the torture of detainees held in U.S. custody;

The bill provides $1.2 billion, a reduction of $300 million from the request for the Commanders Emergency Response Program (CERP) authority and fences $500 million pending a spending plan from the Department of Defense; and

Provides no funds for the closure of the detention facility at Guantanamo Naval base.

I yield back the balance of my time, Madam Speaker.

Madam Speaker, I rise as a Member of the Foreign Affairs Committee to support House passage H.R. 3326, making appropriations for the Department of Defense for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2010. I urge the Congress to support the President's initiatives to terminate or reduce programs that fund narrowly focused activities, duplicate existing programs, or that have outlived their usefulness, specifically including the Kinetic Energy Interceptor program. The Congress is encouraged to adopt proposals made by the administration that would better target scarce resources and redirect funds to programs with greater potential for results.

I believe in a strong procurement approach that takes advantage of the efficiencies associated with an award to a single contractor.

I look forward to working with the Congress to address concerns regarding statutory direction to re-organize certain offices within the Office of the Director of National Intelligence (ODNI), reductions to cyber security programs, and cuts to classified activities in ODNI.

The measure provides more funding for equipment depleted by the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, special pay raises, and quality of life improvements for the troops and their families. It partially offsets these increases by cutting funding from current levels for missile defense and futuristic programs like the Future Combat System of new vehicles. I support the President in adding more money into the budget for our military families. I am disappointed that this bill appropriates no funds for the closure of the prison at Guantanamo, and blocks the transfer of prisoners. The bill references a detailed plan for the disposition of the detainees to be submitted and I look forward to seeing this plan. It also provides a 3.4% pay increase for military personnel, and a 2% pay raise for civilian federal employees which is vital in maintaining the morale of the

troops and the federal law enforcement personnel that help secure America.

Finally, this bill prohibits the use of funds in the bill to establish permanent military bases in Iraq or U.S. control of Iraqi oil resources.

The bill also continues the prohibition on the use of funds provided for the Iraq Security Forces for the construction of facilities for the Iraqi government.

I support all provisions that require the Defense secretary to report to Congress on troop drawdown status and goals relating to the withdrawal of U.S. forces from Iraq by the end of 2011. The report, which is due 90 days after enactment and every 90 days thereafter, must include the following:

A detailed, month-by-month description of the transition of U.S. military forces and equipment out of Iraq;

A detailed, month-by-month description of the transition of U.S. contractors out of Iraq; and

How the Iraqi government is assuming the responsibility for reconciliation initiatives as the U.S. role transitions.

It is absolutely imperative that the U.S. Congress and the President agree on an eventual drawdown and removal of our forces from Iraq.

I am proud of the support to the military and their children that the FY 2010 Defense Appropriations bill provides. Congress approved a 3.4 percent increase in military pay, 0.5 percent above the Department of Defense request. This bill includes $29.2 billion for medical care for the Defense Health Program, which provides medical care for members of the armed services and their families. Included in the health care funding are $372 million for military medical research and $120 million for Traumatic Brain Injury and Psychological Health Research.

The FY10 Defense Appropriations bill included $472.4 million for Family Advocacy programs including Family Support and Yellow Ribbon. These programs include quality child care, job training for spouses, and an expansion of counseling services. For the families that experience the daily heartache of having a loved one far away, these programs reach out and provide support. I want to thank Chairman Murtha for his untiring support of our troops and their families.

I want to stress that none of these funds will go toward the administration's plan to send 30,000 additional troops to Afghanistan, and I will continue to scrutinize the economic, military and social impacts of the administration's request. I am concerned about the cost of sending additional troops, as well as the effect that a larger presence in Afghanistan will have on troop morale. The White House estimates that it will cost $1 million per year for each additional soldier deployed, and I believe that $30 billion would be better spent on developing new jobs, and fixing our broken healthcare system, as well as in using ``smart power'' to peacefully work on the Afghan cease-fire.

The cost and the long-term commitment were given renewed significance on Tuesday, December 9, 2009 when Afghan President Hamid Karzai said, as reported in the New York Times, that ``Afghanistan would not be able to pay for its own security until at least 2024.'' Secretary Robert Gates echoed that sentiment when he said that ``For another 15 to 20 years, Afghanistan will not be able to sustain a force of that nature and capacity with its own resources.'' If our strategy is to use $50 billion to build up Afghanistan's police and military forces as well as a decades-long commitment, I am not sure that the American people will support such an effort.

Yet, no matter your opinion on their role in conflict, it is important that our troops are prepared for the current combat environment. As such, the Defense appropriations bill includes $154 billion to increase the readiness of our armed forces, helping to refocus our military away from the Cold-War era type of conflict.

A bill of this magnitude must include safeguards against waste, abuse, and fraud. Not only does this bill increase the resources at the disposal of the Department of Defense (DOD) Inspector General, it also enhances the focus on taking inherently governmental functions out of the hands of contractors.

Finally, it will be a great celebration in Houston with the establishment of the Riverside General Hospital Post Traumatic Stress Disorder Center with a $1 million grant. Additionally, I have received over $4 million in green job, technology, and medical research funding. These dollars will work for the 18th Congressional District and the American people.

Madam Speaker, I rise in opposition to H.R. 3326, the Fiscal Year 2010 Department of Defense Appropriations Act.

The President's announcement last week came as no surprise to me and many of my colleagues; he has consistently stated throughout the Presidential campaign and during his first year in office that he is committed to shifting military resources from Iraq into Afghanistan. Nonetheless, I am disappointed the President has moved ahead with, what I believe to be, an incorrect course of action.

As we move forward in this process, it is imperative that the House consider all options about how to best succeed in Afghanistan. It is in this spirit today that I want to announce the creation of a new ``Peace and Progress in Afghanistan Caucus'' that will give Democrats and Republicans a place to organize and advocate for a new strategy that recognizes the need to redeploy our troops, while strengthening our civilian and diplomatic approaches.

The presence of military troops in Afghanistan is having a detrimental effect on our efforts to secure a lasting peace in the region and diffuse the threat of international terrorism. Our military presence only inflames anti-American resentment.

Only by pursuing a wide-ranging policy that focuses on reorienting the United States' commitment to the Afghan government and people by emphasizing indigenous reconciliation and reconstruction strategies, rigorous regional diplomacy, and swift redeployment of the US military, will we ultimately succeed in Afghanistan.''

I was extremely heartened that two of the three prongs of the President's new strategy focus on a civilian surge and on diplomacy with Pakistan. It is a shame that the funding in this bill will not support these worthy approaches. The President believes that the United States can transform resentment into hope by working with our humanitarian and local government partners on the ground to give the Afghan people access to education, strong civic institutions, and a sustainable, legitimate source of income.

I believe that a new focus on a civilian surge should also empower local NGOs and initiatives that directly benefit the Afghan people, like the highly successful National Solidarity Project, an Afghan-run community development program.

Similarly, if the Pakistani people understand that we are committed to helping secure their safety and prosperity, they will step up their efforts to combat terrorism within their borders. Additionally, I believe we must expand our thinking beyond Pakistan to include other actors and countries that affect the greater region. One of the least discussed aspects of this conflict is the role India must play in promoting regional peace. For years, the Pakistani military and intelligence services have been hesitant to crack down on Taliban militants operating in the tribal regions because they fear the establishment of an Afghan government that would be susceptible to Indian influence. Such a worst case scenario, in their view, would give one of their traditional regional foes a foothold on both their northern and southern borders.

In order to secure a long-term regional peace, the President must engage India and Pakistan to seek a final political agreement on Kashmir. Only when Pakistan feels secure in the south, will the Pakistani army be able to focus its efforts on defeating the Taliban who dwell along the Afghan border.

I look forward to working with the President to promote and expand these critical approaches to securing victory.

The President has committed to ending the war in a responsible manner. Although we disagree on the means being employed to reach that laudable goal at the moment, I believe that I and other pro-peace, pro- national security Members of Congress can help him can craft a successful policy that will bring our troops home as soon as possible.

In the meantime, I will continue to oppose funding a war that emphasizes a heavy military footprint. No amount of additional troops can bring a war with no military solution to an end.

Madam Speaker, today, I inadvertently cast a ``yea'' vote during rollcall vote 985. My intention was to cast a ``nay'' vote on H.R. 3326, a bill making appropriations for the Department of Defense for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2010, and for other purposes.

Madam Speaker, the base bill of H.R. 3326, the FY2010 Defense Appropriations bill, effectively meets the needs of our men and women in uniform. Although not perfect, H.R. 3326 takes important steps to invest in the people and equipment of the United States Armed Forces. Sadly, Democrat leadership has once again decided to use this vital and non-partisan piece of legislation to enact controversial measures, such as bringing terrorists to U.S. soil.

The United States military is the strongest in the world due to our people, training and equipment. I am happy to say that each of those is strongly supported in this legislation.

Our military men and women are patriots and the world's finest soldiers, sailors, airmen and Marines. Congress has a moral obligation to offer them our thanks and unwavering support. Although we can never fully repay their sacrifice and commitment, H.R. 3326 at least provides a pay raise. The bill provides a 3.4 percent pay raise for all servicemembers, which is 0.5% higher than that proposed by the Obama administration.

Our military and their families deserve the world's finest medical care. H.R. 3326 makes a $30 billion investment to care for sick and wounded servicemembers and their families. This includes $370 million for medical research and $120 million for Traumatic Brain Injury and psychological health research.

The legislation also provides $500 million for family advocacy programs that support military families. With so many servicemen and women deployed overseas, our military families are under particular strain. Whether at Fort Riley or McConnell Air Force Base, Kansas families need this extra assistance when their loved ones are deployed. The bill makes the right investments to ensure they are protected and supported.

Given the diverse roles our military performs--from safeguarding nuclear weapons to fighting terrorists in the jungles of the Philippines--rigorous training is essential to ensure our troops are ready for action and come home safely when the job is done. To achieve this objective, H.R. 3326 provides $154 billion for operations and maintenance accounts. During the 1990s, our nation had a ``hollow military''--filled with people and equipment, but lacking the necessary training and readiness to be successful. We must never allow this to occur again.

Ensuring that our military has the finest equipment available is essential, and H.R. 3326 makes some necessary investments. With funding for the Next Generation Aerial Refueling Aircraft replacement, the Navy's Multi-mission Maritime Aircraft, and additional C-17 aircraft, among many other programs, our troops will have the most advanced equipment to effectively carry out the will of this nation and return home safely. These programs also create high-paying Kansas jobs that we so desperately need.

While this legislation makes the right investments in our fighting men and women and their families, it also includes a dangerous provision for our nation: allowing terrorists detainees currently held at Guantanamo Bay to be brought to the United States.

Terrorists do not belong in the streets or prisons of America. Following the dangerous decision to house unrepentant terrorists in the Midwest, this legislation does nothing to restrict the president's obsession with closing the detention facility at Guantanamo Bay and bringing terrorists to the United States. We have the most secure, state-of-the-art detention and interrogation facility in the world at Guantanamo Bay. That is where the terrorists should remain. They should never be brought to the United States.

Although Democrats continue to play politics with this spending bill, I cannot do the same. Our men and women in uniform deserve the resources to carry out the will of this nation, and this bill provides those. Therefore, I intend to vote for H.R. 3326 and I encourage my colleagues to do the same.

I very much appreciate my colleague for yielding.

Madam Speaker, my friend, Mr. Murtha, has spent some time at Bethesda, and I would like to recognize the contributions that he has made to this bill and to the work he has done with Mr. Young.

Madam Speaker, it has taken months to get to this point but I'm pleased to see that we are finally considering a Defense Appropriations bill to provide funds for the men and women of our armed forces and the national security needs of our country.

We should have been on the House floor months ago--months ago-- passing a clean Defense funding bill. Like many Members, I questioned the priorities of the Democrat leadership in moving this year's funding bills, particularly the decision to send the President the Legislative Branch conference report as our first completed bill. It sent an unmistakable signal that the House majority was putting the needs of Congress first and placing the needs of our troops at the end of the line.

I know there has been great temptation to use the Defense bill as the vehicle to carry many unrelated legislative items that could not and would not muster enough support to pass on their own. And while this package before us is far from clean, it's a streamlined version of what was, just a few days ago, shaping up to be the mother of all Christmas tree bills.

It was Chairman Obey who, on December 18th, 2005 said, and I quote, ``The defense bill ought to be about delivering equipment and supporting our troops. There is something especially outrageous and callous about the willingness of the majority party leadership to allow the Defense Department bill in a time of war to be held hostage to totally unrelated legislative items.''

But that is precisely what we are doing by including a variety of non-defense related legislative provisions in this package. Some items like COBRA, food stamps, and so-called ``poverty guidelines'' have been manipulated in a way to suit the Chairman's purposes for redistributing income in America but do not reflect the agreement reached to garner bipartisan support on this bill.

We are also designating as emergency spending an additional $20 billion worth of program extensions. I'm not arguing that some of these are unworthy but merely pointing out that they should have no place in a defense spending bill. At the very least, we should pay for them honestly rather than continuing to add to our mountain of debt.

More curious to me is the fact that buried within this legislation is an airdropped Member project in the form of bill language authorizing the payment of nearly $13 million to a county in North Carolina. I can only assume that this project meets all of the necessary requirements for congressional projects. No one

seems to know how or why this project was included in this package but it's there in black and white for the world to see.

Also disconcerting is the fact that the underlying defense spending bill fails to include funding needed for additional MRAPS to support the 30,000 troop surge in Afghanistan. My understanding is that the House and Senate majority and minority were in full agreement to funding an additional 4,000 MRAPS--and yet a decision was made at another level--perhaps even at a staff level--to leave this vital funding out of this package. Again, it's a decision like this that causes me to scratch my head and question the priorities of this majority leadership.

At the end of the day, this legislation is far from perfect; I would vote against Division B if given the opportunity. But it is a vast improvement over the massive train wreck that was heading our way earlier this week. I strongly support the underlying defense portion of this package and ask our colleagues to support our troops who are defending freedom at home and abroad.